Know Your 'Rafale'

[Sancho]

LOL, Check Post 14222...

Caught red handed to create fake arguments and we are back to 1 liners and pointless links?

 

[Sancho]

.........................................

 

[Prashant12]

Caught red handed to create fake arguments and we are back to 1 liners and pointless links?

Yes fake arguments from you, first u claim:

The same had been the case for a Rafale MMRCA deal, because Kaveri revival is part of the offsets.

Show me one proof that Kaveri revival was part of the offsets in mmrca deal.

pointless links?

I gave link to source to prove the price of MMRCA deal. And you make random claims without any proof.

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

Just because you have no clue what you are talking about, doesn't mean that that he same applies to everybody. You don't even know how many weapon stations the fighters have and now are trying to understand something as complex as procurement costs of fighters, flyaway and system costs, economy of scale...
Sorry buddy, but try to inform yourself on basics and don't get involved in topics, that you have no idea about.

Calling sub-pylons as weapon-station is incorrect. For that matter, a single pylon can also be stacked. Also, even Tejas has cannon and pod space under its fuselage which can also be used for MICA type WVR which weigh less than the weight of the cannon. But, we are graceful enough to accept that these are not main weapon station but sub-pylons.

 

[Bhurki]

What we know so far, is that Dassault plans to build Falcon 2000 business jet parts and assembly of the aircraft at DRAL.
Thales plans to integrate and maintain radar and avionics at DRAL, after they produced most of them in France.
Offsets are calculated by the value of the deal and neither have to be of the product we procure, nor of the defence sector at all. Just as it doesn't have to be production based, but can be services like maintenance as well.

What rules apply to the class of products which can be manufactured under offset obligation. I mean there is certainly bound to be some technical consideration. Or a country that wants to hide away its tech capabilities might bake Eur 4 bn worth of biscuits(pun) in India and be done with it. Is it that the offsets are to be in the exact same category of tech as used in the incoming equipment, or is it bound in some different contract like some rumours(truth?) of kaveri revival through snecma partnership? Also please put some light on the rumour..
On a side note, please don't get personal with anybody other than a light friendly debate maybe.. Literally none of us have any effect on the defence posture, tech of any country, so all of us debating on this forum is purely for the sake of self satisfaction on a factual basis. The defence programs of a country are not going to come off of their wheels just because a certain person debated against it.

 

[vampyrbladez]

.........................................

Congrats Sir, you just revealed your entire position is based on a political fallacy than a technical or policy solution.

 

[Sancho]

Congrats Sir, you just revealed your entire position is based on a political fallacy than a technical or policy solution.

Lol, maybe you should inform yourself who Yusuf Unjhawala is, but then again, you showed before to comment on things you don't know about.

 

[vampyrbladez]

Lol, maybe you should inform yourself who Yusuf Unjhawala is, but then again, you showed before to comment on things you don't know about.

I know he is the editor @ DFI but taking a political stand on a technical and national security issue is bullshit. Comment is free but facts are sacred. Your facts unfortunately fall short under scrutiny and thus you run behind talking points for cover.

From EF 2000 MMRCA Advocate to Rafale Conspiracy Theory Tinfoil Hat Man

- Sancho (2011 - 2018)

 

[Sancho]

What rules apply to the class of products which can be manufactured under offset obligation.

Unless a tender requires certain technologies, offsets are mainly bound on the OEM. They neither have to have a relation to the product we procure, nor have to be defence, or manufacturing related. They can produce civil products (Falcon business jet), divert services like Thales (integration and maintenance), or Safran (consultancy on Kaveri engine revival)...
There are only sub component production , that might have some relation to Rafale (parts of AASM, cockpit displays), that might find it's way to Indian industry, which is similar to what we have seen from Dassault and Co as part of the Mirage 2000 upgrade deal and it's offset parts.

On a side note, please don't get personal with anybody other than a light friendly debate maybe..

If there is a real aim on getting info's, or fact based debate, I am happy to join and give appropriate answers accordingly. You asked a genuine question and therefore got a genuine answer. But forums also attract fanboys and know it all's that only argue for the sake of disagreing with made up arguments, or simple denial of facts. These people can't be taken seriously and it's more fun to expose their flawed claims and arguments in the manner they argue themselves as well. You won't see me getting personal by calling people names, or similar stuff, because I prefer to argue with facts and credible sources.

 

[Sancho]

I know he is the editor @ DFI but taking a political stand on a technical and national security issue is bullshit.

And there you have 2 problems! Once you accused me of a political stand, when I only posted Yusufs tweet.
Secondly, there is no political stand or statement, by posting a caricature, that truthfully and in a funny way, shows the problem of the Rafale deal now!
The whole issue got not that big, because Congress proved something, but because the government failed to provide even simple answers to valid questions!

Was there any approval ahead of the announcement in Paris? That was one of the questions that were raised several times, to which the government till date, never gave an appropriate answer and sticked to approvals in 2016, ahead of the contracts signature instead. Now Arun Jaitley accidently seems to have exposed, that the only approval of the announcement itself, came a month after the announcement.

But that is only one of the many questions this deal has raised and you don't have to agree to Congress, to see problems, in fact Congress is only focusing on corruption and not the real problems, because the corruption issue serves their purposes.

From EF 2000 MMRCA Advocate to Rafale Conspiracy Theory Tinfoil Hat Man

Lol and I thought I was promoting Gripen E? But that's the problem, I don't support a specific fighter, an OEM, or a political party, but IAF and what is in their best interest!

That's why I supported Rafale as the best choice for IAF from 2008 to 2015...

why I distinguish between Rafale the fighter and Dassault the OEM that caused the blockade of the MMRCA negotiations

why I am clear about the fact, that the Rafale deal is bad for IAF, because they neither wanted specifically Rafale, nor such low numbers...

why the EF should had been considered for the separate deal for 36 fighters, since it was technically compliant to IAF requirements

or why I was for Gripen E in the single engine MMRCA, because it's clearly the more capable fighter for IAF, compared to the F16 B70, which many IAF officials confirmed as well


So what you think to know and what actually is true, are very different things, be it about the Rafale deal, or about me.

 

[Sancho]

Apart of the Rafale issue

 

[vampyrbladez]

And there you have 2 problems! Once you accused me of a political stand, when I only posted Yusufs tweet.
Secondly, there is no political stand or statement, by posting a caricature, that truthfully and in a funny way, shows the problem of the Rafale deal now!
The whole issue got not that big, because Congress proved something, but because the government failed to provide even simple answers to valid questions!

Was there any approval ahead of the announcement in Paris? That was one of the questions that were raised several times, to which the government till date, never gave an appropriate answer and sticked to approvals in 2016, ahead of the contracts signature instead. Now Arun Jaitley accidently seems to have exposed, that the only approval of the announcement itself, came a month after the announcement.

But that is only one of the many questions this deal has raised and you don't have to agree to Congress, to see problems, in fact Congress is only focusing on corruption and not the real problems, because the corruption issue serves their purposes.



Lol and I thought I was promoting Gripen E? But that's the problem, I don't support a specific fighter, an OEM, or a political party, but IAF and what is in their best interest!

That's why I supported Rafale as the best choice for IAF from 2008 to 2015...

why I distinguish between Rafale the fighter and Dassault the OEM that caused the blockade of the MMRCA negotiations

why I am clear about the fact, that the Rafale deal is bad for IAF, because they neither wanted specifically Rafale, nor such low numbers...

why the EF should had been considered for the seperate deal for 36 fighters, since it was technically compliant to IAF requirements

or why I was for Gripen E in the single engine MMRCA, because it's clearly the more capable fighter for IAF, compared to the F16 B70, which many IAF officials confirmed as well


So what you think to know and what actually is true, are very different things, be it about the Rafale deal, or about me.

The MMRCA project was launched to buy the production line for Mirage 2000 jets post Kargil which in turn morphed into a full fledged 12 billion dollar deal to buy fighter jets to the tune of no.s 126. The obvious choice from the beginning was EF 2000 and Rafale and the others were included simply for pricing concerns. Navy was and still is interested in F/A 18 SH for CBG and wanted it downselected. Air Force wanted a next generation fighter with supercruise, high TWR, ITR, STR and stealth capability with advanced jamming technology and radars like AESA based solution.

https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1009249

https://www.stratpost.com/fa-18-as-good-as-5th-gen-us-navy/

https://www.thehindu.com/2005/07/25/stories/2005072506021200.htm

In L2 selection Rafale edged out competitors like F/A 18 SH , F 16 Blk 60 and Gripen E/F to emerge as shortlisted. Then EF 2000 also was in the running. However by pricing Rafale was cheaper and down selected as L1. EF 2000 before 36 Rafale deal made offer for cheaper EF 2000 to woo India but being a violation of Defence Procurement Procedure was not considered.

Keep in mind that original pricing was done with a late 2000s budget in mind. Rupee value owing to fiscal deficit, crude oil and inflation has plummeted to 70 ish since then.

If you add in delay during procurement thanks to St. Anthony, a receding Rupee value will make everything cost more in addition to the entire cost of manufacturing the Rafales locally. At one point during the discussions for MMRCA India was seriously considering cancelling the deal and moving ahead with LCA or SU 30 MKI orders.

https://www.deccanherald.com/content/238253/rafale-deal-scanner.html <- Anthony as DM defending deal

https://www.livemint.com/Politics/h...rly-to-look-for-foul-play-in-Rafale-deal.html

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...-guarantee-to-France/articleshow/32965491.cms

https://www.dnaindia.com/india/repo...ikely-to-dent-iaf-s-strike-capability-1957107 <- Cost Escalation

IAF was adamant like a kid crying on the floor at a toy shop to have Rafale and knew that Modi govt. would never give it 126 Rafales locally manufactured again due to pricing issues.

https://www.rbth.com/blogs/2014/10/26/why_india_needs_to_rethink_the_rafale_deal_39297

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/nor...-deal-by-march-iaf-official-214650-2013-10-17

https://thediplomat.com/2015/08/confirmed-indias-mother-of-all-defense-deals-is-dead/

So a compromise was reached and 36 MKI-ed Rafale would be bought and with option for 18 more in contract. After a short while more would be bought in tranches.

https://qz.com/india/382873/timeline-the-collapse-of-indias-largest-defense-deal/

http://www.rediff.com/news/column/defence-news-the-rafale-deal-is-modis-masterstroke/20150602.htm

Around the same time Anthony started slamming the deal for exposing what a magnificent cunt he was when it came to deal making.

https://indianexpress.com/article/i...offensive-antony-slams-govt-over-rafale-deal/ <- Anthony slamming the deal ; start of manufactured controversy

 

[vampyrbladez]

Contd.

Rafale deal now has become what can be called a manufactured controversy. Even 'leaked' documents show NDA actually getting a cheaper Rafale while MKI-ising it! This change in attitude from 2013 - 2015 is what you call manufactured controversy. If Rafale gets cancelled it will be seen as huge victory for EF 2000 lobby and UPA govt. However when dumb fucks like Rahul Gandhi lead the pack they circle jerk into oblivion. When they get caught up, they forget their meds and start chimping out again.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...crore-in-rafale-deal/articleshow/61760997.cms

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/sto...-rafale-aircraft-under-nda-1295288-2018-07-25

https://indianexpress.com/article/i...-aircraft-cost-9-cheaper-in-new-deal-5330685/

https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...ssing-of-july-target/articleshow/48288656.cms

And now govt. will buy even more in tranches under guise of MMRCA 2.0 while having a cheap plane locked in including offsets.

http://bharatshakti.in/to-save-time-govt-may-bypass-field-trials-in-mmrca-2-0/

Gripen tried a lot of marketing tactics and even put up ads near MP's and MLA's homes.

Ultimately buying Gripen you get a substandard MMRCA which will kill off LCA Mk2 and Mk1A in the future and with all the US supplied parts is a definite hard pass for IAF. Swedish cucks also have no plans for future proofing it and the project trajectory is ridiculous.

I have tremendous respect for Yusuf-ji but I didn't like his politicising issues of national security and procurement. Everyone is entitled to his opinion and if everyone agreed with everything I'd be an SJW zombie.

Rafale vs EF 2000 has been discusses here for aeons. I'll leave it at that.

Edit: Yes, I am that autistic to web crawl using memory and post a timeline of the entire thing . This is what happens when you have been an old fag for too long.

 

[Sancho]

Interesting post, although it has nothing to do with what you claimed before, or my reply.

At one point during the discussions for MMRCA India was seriously considering cancelling the deal and moving ahead with LCA or SU 30 MKI orders.

So a compromise was reached and 36 MKI-ed Rafale would be bought and with option for 18 more in contract.

That's factually wrong, because neither did IAF ever considered MKIs and LCAs, instead of MMRCAs (they rejected the proposals by the government and insisted on MMRCAs, not Rafale), nor was there ever a compromise to cutting numbers, since Parrikar and the MoD were still negotiating with Dassault for the MMRCA deal, when the PM made his own announcement in Paris. That's why the MMRCA tender, was cancelled only months after the announcement, after it was clear, that the government is not going to buy more Rafales, which Parrikar even confirmed publicly too, by claiming that they only serve a strategic purpose, which IAF also never requested.

This change in attitude from 2013 - 2015 is what you call manufactured controversy.

The NDA government came into power by may 2014, the Rafale deal was announced in April 2015, so there was no Rafale controversy in the time you claim.
What changed was, that Congress started another push last year (ahead of the coming elections) and the new DM Sitharaman first claimed to be transparent and provide all details to counter their allegations, but then made a U turn, just to hide behind secrecy clause. That's when the Rafale controversy picked up, because more and more valid questions were raised and the government kept failing to provide answers!

So you have made an interesting link collection, but your conclusions are based only on your opinions and with the aim to create a justification for the deal. But the fact remains, that the deal does not provide IAF with the numbers they need to defend the country, nor the industrial advantages, the MMRCA was all about!
That's why the NDA government itself , created the SE MMRCA tender, under their own SP policy, which makes blaming lobbies and other vedndors pretty pointless, you can't try to defend NDA decisions and ignore their own policies and tenders, which had exactly the same aims of the original MMRCA tender (numbers and industrial advantages) and were constructed by them, to keep Rafale out.

I have tremendous respect for Yusuf-ji but I didn't like his politicising issues of national security and procurement.

He is not politicising at all and openly admits that he voted for BJP initially. But that doesn't mean that he has to close his eyes on mistakes, which is why he states that even if the government wanted only 36 Rafales, that it would had been logical to consider both compliant fighters, to get the best price. Common sense, not political!

 

[vampyrbladez]

IAF ever considered MKIs and LCAs



The NDA government came into power by may 2014, the Rafale deal was announced in April 2015, so there was no Rafale controversy in the time you claim.

new DM Sitharaman first claimed to be transparent and provide all details to counter their allegations, but then made a U turn, just to hide behind secrecy clause. That's when the Rafale controversy picked up, because more and more valid questions were raised and the government kept failing to provide answers!

the NDA government itself , created the SE MMRCA tender, under their own SP policy.

IAF was gutting it's future acquisitions to bolster squadron numbers. It was unable to figure out whether to put money in FGFA or MMRCA as GoI doesn't have 20 - 30bn $ lying about.

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/north/story/iaf-dassault-rafale-mmrca-deal-aircraft-91544-2012-02-01

https://www.ibtimes.co.in/indian-ai...er-aircraft-cut-costs-by-ordering-just-642594

https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...-be-inducted-into-iaf/articleshow/9899727.cms

Charges regarding L1 discrepancy were raised around Anthony's time. Because UPA was in power nothing happened. The fact that MMRCA was resolved this way is more belittling to Congis than the deal itself. It makes a fool of their policies. Also 2019 election is drawing near and they have 0 to show for any platform. This is a hail mary pass in their "DO NOT OPEN UNLESS EMERGENCY / ELECTION AGENDA PLAN C" box by Cambridge Analytica before it got disbanded.

https://www.deccanherald.com/content/238253/rafale-deal-scanner.html

The entire deal is a G2G deal which means 0 middlemen involved. This means that unless govt. of France, Dassault, MBDA and pretty much every A/C manufacturer is corrupt you cannot finger GoI. Both parties must consent to release of info to avoid influencing other bids by company and certain privileges. Congress tried this BS and France whipped back against this.

https://www.dailypioneer.com/todays-newspaper/france-rejects-rahuls-rafale-secrecy-claim.html

https://www.business-standard.com/a...s-comments-on-rafale-deal-118072001135_1.html

Absolutely true. NDA is just fucking around with manufacturers and trying to 'feel' around for a strategic partner for JV and ToT. Everyone knows this will amount to nothing and is just smoke to order more Rafales.

http://bharatshakti.in/to-save-time-govt-may-bypass-field-trials-in-mmrca-2-0/

https://www.deccanherald.com/content/238253/rafale-deal-scanner.html

 

[Sancho]

Charges regarding L1 discrepancy ere raised around Anthony's time. Because UPA was in power nothing happened. The fact that MMRCA was resolved this way is more belittling to Congis than the deal itself.

Lol, yes by the BJP opposition with claims like, Rafale is not good because it never was exported, or it's A2G capability was not good in Libya. So much for politicising the Rafale, ahead of elections. :biggrin2:

As sad as it is, this is Indian politics from both sides, but that's not the issue about the Rafale deal.

P.S. You need to get your facts on the time line right as well

- MMRCA RFP was issued in August 2007
- the evaluation of IAF took till August 2010
- MoD shortlisted the contenders by April 2011
- Rafale was selected as the winner in January 2012
- MMRCA negotiations with UPA and NDA went on till July 2015, but were stalled by Dassaults non compliance to the RFP

The only delay we have seen, was in the evaluation itself, because too many fighters were approved to it and after the selection of Rafale, because till April 2015, Dassault kept slowing down and stalling the process. UPA, NDA and IAF urged them to follow RFP rules, which they rejected and why there was no way forward. That however does not justify a bad 36 fighter deal, nor to award Dassault with a 9 billion USD price, for messing up the MMRCA, that's why the PM still needs to explain, how this deal was made and why?

 

[vampyrbladez]

Lol, yes by the BJP opposition with claims like, Rafale is not good because it never was exported, or it's A2G capability was not good in Libya. So much for politicising the Rafale, ahead of elections. :biggrin2:

As sad as it is, this is Indian politics from both sides, but that's not the issue about the Rafale deal.

P.S. You need to get your facts on the time line right as well

- MMRCA RFP was issued in August 2007
- the evaluation of IAF took till August 2010
- MoD shortlisted the contenders by April 2011
- Rafale was selected as the winner in January 2012
- MMRCA negotiations with UPA and NDA went on till July 2015, but were stalled by Dassaults non compliance to the RFP

The only delay we have seen, was in the evaluation itself, because too many fighters were approved to it and after the selection of Rafale, because till April 2015, Dassault kept slowing down and stalling the process. UPA, NDA and IAF urged them to follow RFP rules, which they rejected and why there was no way forward.

Your problem is with deal or with politics? That's what confuses me. No deal in this world will be clean unless you have G2G deals. Tenders = corruption and politics. Mark my words SP DPP is just to get more Rafales. IAF and GoI know this. Funny observation is 2022. Every policy revolves around that date.

 

[BON PLAN]

What we know so far, is that Dassault plans to build Falcon 2000 business jet parts and assembly of the aircraft at DRAL.
Thales plans to integrate and maintain radar and avionics at DRAL, after they produced most of them in France.
Offsets are calculated by the value of the deal and neither have to be of the product we procure, nor of the defence sector at all. Just as it doesn't have to be production based, but can be services like maintenance as well.

I think, until another deal for a second batch of Rafale will not be inked, the DRAL factory will only make Falcon parts.
But if you are qualified to built components and assemble business planes, you are ready do produce weapons parts and jets.
The DRAL factory, and the agrements signs by Thales and Safran are "just" there so as to be fast in MII in the case of a second Rafale order.

Dassault, with this factory, is the sole jet manufacturer in the MMRCA to be able to propose the shortest delivery delay of MII jets.

 

[BON PLAN]

So you are completely wrong on any relation of Kaveri and MMRCA, just as that there was any politics involved!

It depends what you called MMRCA.
There is a link between the GtoG 36 Rafale deal and the Safran help on Kaveri.

 

[Armand2REP]

Your problem is with deal or with politics? That's what confuses me. No deal in this world will be clean unless you have G2G deals. Tenders = corruption and politics. Mark my words SP DPP is just to get more Rafales. IAF and GoI know this. Funny observation is 2022. Every policy revolves around that date.

It wasn't even an issue of corruption. When the estimate was forwarded to HAL they quoted 2.7X the man hours required to make it than Dassault. That made it too expensive which is ultimately why it was decided to make them in France. If HAL could have matched the man hours MMRCA for all 126 - 18 would be built by HAL right now, that and Dassault required HAL warranty their own work. HAL could neither meet the productivity schedule or the guarantee.